Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
The HC dismissed the appeal and affirmed the impugned judgment, holding that imposition of interest/penalty by the regulator was without jurisdiction in the absence of a valid demand notice. The court found that Regulation 3(Form I) and Regulation 5 of the 2011 Regulations make issuance of a demand notice a statutory precondition to any accrual of interest; interest accrues only upon failure to pay within the period specified in such notice. The regulator's contention that interest automatically crystallises on expiry of the penalty period was rejected as unsupported by the statutory scheme and contrary to the principle of legality. No restitutionary or pari materia basis exists to retroactively trigger interest; appeal dismissed.
The HC dismissed the appeal and affirmed the impugned judgment, holding that imposition of interest/penalty by the regulator was without jurisdiction in the absence of a valid demand notice. The court found that Regulation 3(Form I) and Regulation 5 of the 2011 Regulations make issuance of a demand notice a statutory precondition to any accrual of interest; interest accrues only upon failure to pay within the period specified in such notice. The regulator's contention that interest automatically crystallises on expiry of the penalty period was rejected as unsupported by the statutory scheme and contrary to the principle of legality. No restitutionary or pari materia basis exists to retroactively trigger interest; appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
